While we were busy wondering about which way Clive Palmer and Malcolm Turnbull spun the lazy susan and the future cost of university degrees that youths can avoid by dying, we ticked over the 23-and-a-half million mark without a murmur, having added an extra 500,000 residents in just 13 months.

Is Australia set up to cope with a rapidly expanding population? Photo: Michaelle Smith

My suspicion is that many, maybe most Australians still think our population is more like 22 million. In one way, there's nothing wrong with that – one of the very few pleasing aspects of Australian politics over the past couple of years is that population growth has quietly slipped off the radar. Both sides know that our aging demographic profile demands strong population growth at least until we boomers shuffle off – if we ever do.

But in another way, it's a seriously bad thing that we don't more broadly comprehend our size, where it is heading and the demands that will place upon us.

At our present population growth rate of 1.8 per cent, the wonder of compound interest means there will be nearly 10 per cent more of us in five years. OK, it's nine-point-something, but 10 per cent sounds better and is easier to work with. So there will be an extra two-and-a-third million or so people to house, transport, feed, clothe, educate, doctor and employ. It's an amazing task to grasp and a wonderful opportunity for business – and it's a more amazing challenge for our politicians.

The budget rhetoric about infrastructure indicates they aren't rising to that challenge. For a start, there's actually less federal money being spent on infrastructure in the new financial year – the relatively little bit of extra Federal cash doesn't flow until 2015-16.

And then it seems to be mainly going on mega road projects that are attempts to solve today's problems - or maybe yesterday's – not the new challenges that will be obvious well before WestConnex is finished. Indeed, some will be obvious before the jackhammers finally start in 14 months. It's instructive that Infrastructure Australia's priority list didn't get much billing in the budget – many of its recommendations don't sound nearly as flash.

The point is, we are already playing catch-up at a rate that won't catch up, especially if the Abbott/Hockey/IPA government continues to push its dangerous and flawed doctrine of competitive federalism. Flicking greater responsibilities onto state governments that are all heading towards financial cliffs won't end up building our future.

To make our growing Australia as enjoyable, functioning and successful as it should be and needs to be, a much bolder and broader vision is required. Instead, we're getting shrinkage.

On Wednesday, the ABS releases the March quarter national accounts. The Reserve Bank's statement on monetary policy last month and the median forecast of 27 private sector economists polled by Bloomberg last week is that March quarter GDP growth should come in at 0.9 per cent, making annual growth of 3.2 per cent. Yes folks, economic growth at or above trend, enough to lower the unemployment rate. We haven't had that for a bit.

But Joe Hockey's forecast is that it won't last, that real GDP growth will slow to just 2.5 per cent through the new financial year. Hockey likes to put the blame for that on the decline in resources construction – but the RBA always reminds us that the fiscal contraction by state and federal governments also is a key factor.

The RBA said before the budget that public demand growth was running at half of what has been average. Hockey's first budget says it will be pushed down to a quarter. More importantly, public investment as a percentage of the economy is running at its lowest level in three quarters of a century, if not longer.

With the infrastructure of our major cities groaning under their present load, a few big roads won't be solving many problems at all by the time they're finished and the population is substantially larger. For all levels of government, hurdles to smarter, better but denser housing remain the norm. The comfortably established in particular want the solutions to our problems to be solved somewhere else, and then pretend concern about where their children might be able to afford to live.

And that's just some of the hardware. As to the more vital software of how we need to be smarter, better skilled and healthier people to improve our quality of our more numerous lives, well that's being punted to the states too – states whose administration and political talent almost make our federal operatives look good.

Meeting our population challenge requires investment, sound investment that will pay handsome dividends that justify borrowing. Our under-investment in crucial hardware and software is a genuine emergency, if the government can understand that, not the manufactured nonsense surrounding our present federal deficit.

Michael Pascoe is a BusinessDay contributing editor.

231 comments

The Government has no mandate to increase the population.

It only creates a an illusion that there is growth in the economy, but we all pay for it with reduced services and reduced quality of life

Write to your local state and federal members...We don't want more people,.

Commenter

JohnBB

Date and time

June 02, 2014, 9:39AM

I never agree with what Pascoe says - but I thought I was going to with this article. Unfortunately he squibs it by calling for more investment to "solve" the crisis of mass immigration; the obvious solution is to reduce immigration to a sustainable level. Investment in infrastructure does not address all the other problems caused by mass immigration.

I will not take seriously ANYTHING the Greens say about climate change until they start calling for lower population growth, both globally and for Australia. How can you price pensioners out of winter heating to address emissions, while upgrading 300,000 people every year from relative poverty to the decadent Western consumer lifestyle.

No-one serious about climate change supports high immigration.

Commenter

Sarah

Date and time

June 02, 2014, 9:39AM

Agree with you, Keshi. Australia needs a population policy, that takes sustainability into account. We cannot just keep increasing at this rate. Economic migration, family reunions, 457 visa applicants and refugee settlement policy all need looking at, and in-coming numbers reduced. This of course, goes against what big business wants. Their LNP puppets will do nothing except to vilify "boat people" - as if they are the sole problem.

Commenter

sotto voce

Date and time

June 02, 2014, 9:43AM

Basically our governments are saying we cannot manage growth unless we issue more passports. They have in essence given up. This is great for the people coming here but terrible for the people who already live here and built this country. The 3 groups to profit are 1, Developers- noticed any ugly apartments popping up near your home?2, Migration agents3, Anyone involved in the so called bull-dust 'Education Revolution''Big Australia' Population means this country is going down the tubes at a great rate. In your lifetime we will leave the British Empire to end up in another Empire. Thanks K Rudd and T Abbott.

Commenter

DifferentLens

Location

Melb

Date and time

June 02, 2014, 9:47AM

Its madness but what can we do, obviously the ideal of lowering emissions and protecting the environment simply can't be achieved if we keep adding to the load, its all just so much bunk.

Commenter

SteveH.

Date and time

June 02, 2014, 9:56AM

+1 Keshi.

All 3 major parties will NOT back down on this big Australia idea. It is pointless to think otherwise.

Vote for the Sustainable Population Party, or get ready to have our cities filled to the brim with unit blocks.

It's as simple as that.

Commenter

Larry

Date and time

June 02, 2014, 10:18AM

my understanding of the infrastructure funding required in this country is that we can't support our existing backlog, let alone build things for new people. what was the number that infrastructure australia put out not that long ago? wasn't it in the 100 billion territory? I understand we're running out of things to sell, and have moved to the new world of PPP's, but that doesn't mean it's in our best interests to keep expanding. we simply don't have enough size in our underlying industrial, transportation or financial services sectors to support that much more growth (ignoring mining, which of course is a member of our other economy). naturally none of this is going to stop anyone - and how else are we going to remain 'relevant' in Asia? of course it's the less affluent who will be more affected, but I guess you can't make an omelet without smashing a few eggs (I'm being very facetious).

Commenter

sun

Date and time

June 02, 2014, 10:20AM

I will definitely be voting for the Population Party!

This is the smartest idea and policy I have seen in over a decade from anyone in the Australian political landscape.